DOCSLIB.ORG

Policy Paper SBIPP03-22042021

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Policy Paper SBIPP03-22042021 Policy Paper Strong Britain Initiative No. SBIPP03 April 2021 How the Chinese Communist Party ‘positions’ the United Kingdom By Matthew Henderson https://www.geostrategy.org.uk Robust | Realistic | Responsible [This page is deliberately left blank.] Contents Foreword 1 Executive summary 2 1.0 Introduction 4 2.0 How the CCP views the world 7 2.1 The impact of PRC domestic and external risk perceptions on positioning discourse 9 2.2 Positioning in CCP methodology 10 3.0 How the CCP positions the UK 13 3.1 CCP attacks on British principles and values 19 4.0 The CCP’s tools for positioning the UK 22 4.1 The role of CCP publications 23 5.0 Conclusion 25 5.1 Recommendations 26 About the author 28 Acknowledgements 29 About the Council on Geostrategy 30 Notes 31 Foreword As Chair of the Defence Select Committee, I am always looking for new work that helps me understand the objectives and strategies of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The United Kingdom’s (UK) Integrated Review identified the People’s Republic of China as a ‘systemic competitor’. As a revisionist autocracy, the Chinese government often actively engages in political operations close to political warfare. We must, therefore, better understand Beijing’s strategic objectives, particularly when the CCP’s actions aim to change what and how we think about critical issues – even our own country’s international role and responsibilities. This paper, by Matthew Henderson, a former British diplomat with several years of experience working in China, outlines Beijing’s discursive goals and operations to frame and reposition the UK as an international actor. It identifies the intersection between the CCP’s worldview and how it views Britain, how it wants Britons and foreign powers to view the UK, and how it projects its narratives domestically (in Britain) and overseas. The paper also looks at how Chinese positioning operations become internalised and adopted in our own discourses about Britain’s international role. What the Council on Geostrategy defines as ‘discursive statecraft’ is clearly a challenge for our generation. The thinking in this paper will help us understand how it is practised by the CCP. The Rt. Hon. Tobias Ellwood MP Chair of the Defence Select Committee House of Commons 1 Executive summary 1. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) views and ‘positions’ foreign powers positively or negatively according to whether they contest or support its revisionist aim to supplant the United States (US) as the dominant global power. The CCP uses a specific form of ‘discursive statecraft’, including positioning operations, within its ‘unrestricted warfare’ strategy, whose purpose is to divide and degrade rivals without the use of military force. 2. In this context, the CCP perceives the United Kingdom (UK) as a challenge embodying both opportunity and risk. Opportunities have been framed as (nominally mutual) gains from increasing economic engagement, described as the dawn of a so-called ‘golden era’. Risks, posed by active British opposition to CCP authoritarianism at home and abroad, have provoked subversive positioning discourses intended to silence critics, ventriloquise proxies and undermine British autonomy, power and global influence. 3. A fundamental element of this negative positioning stems from the CCP’s claim to legitimacy as China’s sole ruler. The CCP is presented as the liberator of Chinese territory and people from nineteenth-century colonial oppressors, with the UK branded as one of the worst. The UK’s continuing legal commitment to Hong Kong under the Joint Declaration has thus been aggressively positioned and rejected as an obsolete irrelevance. Current UK eorts to realise the ‘Global Britain’ concept are also dismissed as a declining middle-sized power’s continuing delusions of imperial grandeur. 4. Other recent positioning in this vein incorporates threats of a Chinese military response to UK involvement in protecting freedom of navigation in maritime regions China lays claim to. The UK is accused of adventurism beyond its proper sphere of influence, driven by the wish to ingratiate itself with the US. British support for values including human rights and the rule of 2 law is positioned as an equally hypocritical ‘imperialist’ attempt to sully China’s international standing and autonomy. 5. In parallel, the CCP has contrived to sustain the notion that the UK needs good relations with China to support its declining economy, particularly since Brexit and damage done by the Covid-19 pandemic. Economic ‘carrots’ are proered and threatening ‘sticks’ wielded concurrently to promote discord in UK domestic and political debate. However, responding to increasingly critical UK government and public discourse on China, the CCP has lately resorted to rather more aggressive, threatening language about the UK in critical ocial statements and state media commentaries aimed at foreign as well as domestic audiences. 6. Despite shifts against China in British public opinion and signs of developing robustness in China policy, the British Government’s reaction to this barrage of positioning remains somewhat inchoate. Eorts to engage the current CCP leadership in debate on such matters are unlikely to succeed. 7. The UK government should instead focus on adopting consistent China policies, grounded in defending the values and interests the UK shares with its closest allies and partners worldwide. To rebalance domestic public debate and counter CCP-inspired local positioning, the government should also demand transparency concerning the Chinese connections of UK-based CCP apologists, and take urgent steps to free Chinese studies in the UK from the current near-stranglehold of PRC-controlled interests. 3 1.0 Introduction When David Cameron, then British Prime Minister, visited China in 2013, the Global Times (环球时报 / Huánqiú Shíbào), media outlet owned by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), commented that China won’t fall for Cameron’s “sincerity”…The Cameron administration should acknowledge that the [United Kingdom] UK is not a big power in the eyes of the Chinese. It is just an old European country apt for travel and study. This has gradually become the habitual thought of the Chinese people.1 This classic example of derogatory shaping was presumably intended to embarrass the Prime Minister of a former colonial oppressor. Coinciding with his eager quest for Chinese investment, it underlined how much Britain’s former victim had gained the upper hand. Interestingly, Cameron had been met with a very similar dismissive Russian comment, attributed to President Vladimir Putin’s ocial spokesman, when he attended the G7 summit a few months earlier. Addressing these attempts to undermine the UK and its government, his responses were robust and dignified.2 At first sight, the CCP’s decision to greet the British prime minister with a scornful put-down just as he came to sign deals with the People’s Republic of China (PRC), worth some £5.6 billion, may seem perverse. But the apparent contradiction is deliberate, reflecting the dual objectives of CCP ‘positioning’ discourse; by combining oers of carrots with glimpses of a big stick, it keeps clients fully aware of what their patron expects in return for its favours. At times, carrots predominate and talk of ‘golden eras’ abound. At others, as in early 2021, abusive denigration and bullying predominate. The challenge is to read CCP messaging accurately as an indicator of shifts in PRC policy rather than simply as a zero-sum war of words. This paper seeks to shed light on how that challenge can be met. 1 ‘China won’t fall for Cameron’s “sincerity”’, Global Times, 03/12/2013, https://bit.ly/3va1Hy1 (found: 19/04/2021). 2 Andrew Foxall, How Russia ‘positions’ the United Kingdom, Council on Geostrategy, 08/04/2021, https://bit.ly/3scZdNj (found: 19/04/2021) and Nicholas Watt, ‘David Cameron dismisses Chinese depiction of Britain as historical’, The Guardian, 03/12/2013, https://bit.ly/3v4Ftx4 (found: 19/04/2021). 4 The Council on Geostrategy’s national positioning series This paper is part of a series produced by the Council on Geostrategy to shed light on the political operations undertaken by foreign governments which aim to redefine the United Kingdom’s position and role in the world. These operations, part of a broader approach which might be defined as ‘discursive statecraft’, can be undertaken by friend and foe, either to nudge a target country towards a dierent course of action or to silence and subdue it. The series focuses on five of the most significant countries to the UK: two competitors – Russia and China – and three allies and partners – Germany, Japan and the United States. The conceptual and methodological paper for the series can be found on the Council on Geostrategy’s website.3 To that end, this Policy Paper examines how the CCP furthers various agendas through ‘discursive statecraft’ using ocial statements and media messaging to position the UK as an increasingly spent force, subservient to the US, alienated from Europe, and yet still vainly seeking to revive past glories under the banner of ‘Global Britain’.4 Observing that UK public and government opinion of China increasingly frames the PRC as a threat to national security, the CCP has begun using increasingly aggressive language in its messaging in an eort to deter the UK from adopting policies unfavourable to PRC objectives. However, as noted above, this minatory positioning should not be regarded as zero-sum. While obviously intended to combat jingoistic criticisms of China, it is also meant to encourage more ‘realistic’ and ‘pragmatic’ British assessments of how the UK would benefit from better relations with a nascent economic superpower, particularly at such an uncertain historical nexus. To set these eorts in context, this study first explains how the CCP views the world. In doing so, it outlines the impact of PRC domestic and external risk perceptions on CCP positioning discourse, before situating national positioning operations in CCP methodology.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Gunboat Diplomacy: Political Bias, Trade Policy, And
    Gunboat Diplomacy Political Bias, Trade Policy, and War∗ Brendan Cooley† 13 November 2019 Abstract Countries with deep trading relationships rarely ght wars with one another. Here, I develop a theory of trade, war, and political bias, in which both trade and war are endogenous objects. Governments can rectify poor market access conditions abroad through war and subsequent regime change, in which the victorious country installs a liberal “puppet” government abroad. Trade policy bargaining is therefore conducted “in the shadow of power,” with counterfactual wars shaping the policy choices that prevail in times of peace. When peace prevails, militarily weak countries are more open to trade than powerful ones, all else equal. Equilibrium trade policies balance domestic interests against military threats from abroad. War is less likely between liberal governments because they prefer less protectionist trade policies. As a result, trade ows and the probability of peace are positively correlated in equilibrium, even though trade does not cause peace. JEL Classication Codes: D72, D74, F13, F51, F52, F54 ∗Ph.D. candidate, Department of Politics, Princeton University. Previous versions of this paper were circulated under the titles “Trade Wars, Hot Wars, and the Commercial Peace” and “Trade Policy in the Shadow of Power.” For helpful comments and discussions on earlier drafts of this paper, I thank Timm Betz, Adrien Bilal, Tyson Chatagnier, Rob Carroll, Andrew Coe, Noel Foster, Erik Gartzke, Kishore Gawande, Dan Gibbs, Joanne Gowa, Gene Grossman,
    [Show full text]
  • Gunboat Diplomacy of the Great Powers on the Ottoman Empire
    Journal of International Eastern European Studies/Uluslararası Doğu Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi, Vol./Yıl. 2, No/Sayı. 2, Winter/Kış 2020) ISSN: 2687-3346 Araştırma Makalesi Gunboat Diplomacy of the Great Powers on the Ottoman Empire: With Particular Reference to the Salonika Incident (1876) and Armenian Reform Demands (1879-80) Fikrettin Yavuz* (ORCID ID: 0000-0002-3161-457X) Makale Gönderim Tarihi Makale Kabul Tarihi 01.12.2020 08.12.2020 Abstract Throughout history, gunboat, a small vessel of a naval force, has been turned into a term of coercive diplomacy. Gunboat diplomacy, associated with chiefly the activities of the Great Powers, means the use of naval power directly or indirectly as an aggressive diplomatic instrument. It seems highly probable to see many examples of this coercive diplomacy in the world history, particularly after the French Revolution. Naturally, the Ottoman Empire, always attracted attention of the Great Powers, was exposed to this policy of the Powers. During the nineteen century, the rivalry among the European Powers on the Ottoman territorial integrity became a common characteristic that led them to implement gunboat diplomacy on all occasions. In this context, this article firstly offers a critical analysis of gunboat diplomacy of the Great Powers on the Ottoman Empire within the dimension of two specific examples: The Salonika Incident and Armenian reform demands. In addition, it aims to contribute to the understanding of gunboat diplomacy of the Great Powers and Ottoman response by evaluating it from native and foreign literatures. Keywords: European Powers, Ottomans, Gunboat Diplomacy, Salonika, Armenian, Reform * Assoc. Prof. Dr., Sakarya University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Department of History, Turkey, [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Imperial China and the West Part I, 1815–1881
    China and the Modern World: Imperial China and the West Part I, 1815–1881 The East India Company’s steamship Nemesis and other British ships engaging Chinese junks in the Second Battle of Chuenpi, 7 January 1841, during the first opium war. (British Library) ABOUT THE ARCHIVE China and the Modern World: Imperial China and the West Part I, 1815–1881 is digitised from the FO 17 series of British Foreign Office Files—Foreign Office: Political and Other Departments: General Correspondence before 1906, China— held at the National Archives, UK, providing a vast and significant primary source for researching every aspect of Chinese-British relations during the nineteenth century, ranging from diplomacy to trade, economics, politics, warfare, emigration, translation and law. This first part includes all content from FO 17 volumes 1–872. Source Library Number of Images The National Archives, UK Approximately 532,000 CONTENT From Lord Amherst’s mission at the start of the nineteenth century, through the trading monopoly of the Canton System, and the Opium Wars of 1839–1842 and 1856–1860, Britain and other foreign powers gradually gained commercial, legal, and territorial rights in China. Imperial China and the West provides correspondence from the Factories of Canton (modern Guangzhou) and from the missionaries and diplomats who entered China in the early nineteenth century, as well as from the envoys and missions sent to China from Britain and the later legation and consulates. The documents comprising this collection include communications to and from the British legation, first at Hong Kong and later at Peking, and British consuls at Shanghai, Amoy (Xiamen), Swatow (Shantou), Hankow (Hankou), Newchwang (Yingkou), Chefoo (Yantai), Formosa (Taiwan), and more.
    [Show full text]
  • International Relations in a Changing World: a New Diplomacy? Edward Finn
    INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IN A CHANGING WORLD: A NEW DIPLOMACY? EDWARD FINN Edward Finn is studying Comparative Literature in Latin and French at Princeton University. INTRODUCTION The revolutionary power of technology to change reality forces us to re-examine our understanding of the international political system. On a fundamental level, we must begin with the classic international relations debate between realism and liberalism, well summarised by Stephen Walt.1 The third paradigm of constructivism provides the key for combining aspects of both liberalism and realism into a cohesive prediction for the political future. The erosion of sovereignty goes hand in hand with the burgeoning Information Age’s seemingly unstoppable mechanism for breaking down physical boundaries and the conceptual systems grounded upon them. Classical realism fails because of its fundamental assumption of the traditional sovereignty of the actors in its system. Liberalism cannot adequately quantify the nebulous connection between prosperity and freedom, which it assumes as an inherent truth, in a world with lucrative autocracies like Singapore and China. Instead, we have to accept the transformative power of ideas or, more directly, the technological, social, economic and political changes they bring about. From an American perspective, it is crucial to examine these changes, not only to understand their relevance as they transform the US, but also their effects in our evolving global relationships.Every development in international relations can be linked to some event that happened in the past, but never before has so much changed so quickly at such an expansive global level. In the first section of this article, I will examine the nature of recent technological changes in diplomacy and the larger derivative effects in society, which relate to the future of international politics.
    [Show full text]
  • Hearing on China's Military Reforms and Modernization: Implications for the United States Hearing Before the U.S.-China Economic
    HEARING ON CHINA'S MILITARY REFORMS AND MODERNIZATION: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE UNITED STATES HEARING BEFORE THE U.S.-CHINA ECONOMIC AND SECURITY REVIEW COMMISSION ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2018 Printed for use of the United States-China Economic and Security Review Commission Available via the World Wide Web: www.uscc.gov UNITED STATES-CHINA ECONOMIC AND SECURITY REVIEW COMMISSION WASHINGTON: 2018 U.S.-CHINA ECONOMIC AND SECURITY REVIEW COMMISSION ROBIN CLEVELAND, CHAIRMAN CAROLYN BARTHOLOMEW, VICE CHAIRMAN Commissioners: HON. CARTE P. GOODWIN HON. JAMES TALENT DR. GLENN HUBBARD DR. KATHERINE C. TOBIN HON. DENNIS C. SHEA MICHAEL R. WESSEL HON. JONATHAN N. STIVERS DR. LARRY M. WORTZEL The Commission was created on October 30, 2000 by the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for 2001 § 1238, Public Law No. 106-398, 114 STAT. 1654A-334 (2000) (codified at 22 U.S.C. § 7002 (2001), as amended by the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for 2002 § 645 (regarding employment status of staff) & § 648 (regarding changing annual report due date from March to June), Public Law No. 107-67, 115 STAT. 514 (Nov. 12, 2001); as amended by Division P of the “Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003,” Pub L. No. 108-7 (Feb. 20, 2003) (regarding Commission name change, terms of Commissioners, and responsibilities of the Commission); as amended by Public Law No. 109- 108 (H.R. 2862) (Nov. 22, 2005) (regarding responsibilities of Commission and applicability of FACA); as amended by Division J of the “Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008,” Public Law Nol. 110-161 (December 26, 2007) (regarding responsibilities of the Commission, and changing the Annual Report due date from June to December); as amended by the Carl Levin and Howard P.
    [Show full text]
  • Exercising Diplomatic Protection the Fine Line Between Litigation, Demarches and Consular Assistance
    Exercising Diplomatic Protection The Fine Line Between Litigation, Demarches and Consular Assistance Annemarieke Künzli* I. Introduction The last Draft Article that was proposed by the Special Rapporteur to the Inter- national Law Commission for inclusion in the Draft Articles on Diplomatic Pro- tection concerns the relationship between diplomatic protection and consular as- sistance. International law distinguishes between (at least) two kinds of interna- tional relations.1 This is stipulated by the existence of two separate treaties: the two Vienna Conventions of 1961 and 1963 have codified the rules with respect to dip- lomatic and consular relations respectively.2 A fundamental difference is that a dip- lomatic agent is a political representative of a state, while a consular officer has no such function.3 As a consequence, the establishment of a consulate in non- recognised territories does not always imply recognition while establishing an em- bassy usually does and immunities granted to ambassadors are markedly different from those granted to consuls.4 In accordance with the two regimes applicable to international relations, international law recognises two kinds of protection states can exercise on behalf of their nationals: consular assistance and diplomatic protec- tion. There are fundamental differences between consular assistance and diplomatic protection. A persistent subject of debate and controversy however is the question of which activities by governments fall under diplomatic protection and which ac- tions do not. This debate is fuelled by an equally persistent misunderstanding of * Ph.D-fellow in Public International Law, Leiden University. The author wishes to thank Prof. John D u g a r d and Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Gunboat Diplomacy, 1919-1991
    GUNBOAT DIPLOMACY, 1919-1991 Published by Macmillan in association with the International Institute for Strategic Studies STUDIES IN INTERNATIONAL SECURI'IY 18 NATIONS IN ARMS: The Theory and Practice of Territorial Defence Adam Roberts 20 THE EVOLUTION OF NUCLEAR STRATEGY (second edition) Lawrence Freedman 23 THE SOVIET UNION: The Incomplete Superpower Paul Dibb 24 ANTI-SUBMARINE WARFARE AND SUPERPOWER STRATEGIC STABILITY Donald C. Daniel 25 HEDLEY BULL ON ARMS CONTROL Hedley Bull 26 EUROPE IN THE WESTERN ALLIANCE: Towards a European Defence Entity? Jonathan Alford and Kenneth Hunt 28 THE DEFENCE OF WHITE POWER: South African Foreign Policy under Pressure Robert ScottJaster 29 PEACEKEEPING IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS Alan James 30 STRATEGIC DEFENCE DEPLOYMENT OPTIONS: Criteria and Evaluation Ivo H. Daalder AN INTRODUCTION TO STRATEGIC STUDIES: Military Technology and International Relations Barry Buzan MILITARY POWER IN EUROPE: Essays in Memory of Jonathan Alford Lawrence Freedman (editor) EUROl1f'.AN SECURITY AND FRANCE Franc;ois de Rose Series Standing Order If you would like to receive future titles in this series as they arc published, you can make usc of our standing order facility. To place a standing order please contact your bookseller or, in case of difficulty, write to us at the address below with your name and address and the name of the series. Please state with which title you wish to begin your standing order. (If you live outside the UK we may not have the rights for your area, in which case we will forward your order to the publisher concerned.) Standing Order ScJvicc, Macmillan Distribution Ltd, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG21 2XS, England Gunboat Diplomacy 1919-1991 Political Applications of Limited Naval Force Third Edition James Cable Foreword by Admiral of the Fleet Sir Julian Oswald, GCB First Sea Lord, 1989-1993 palgrave macmillan © James Cable 1971, 1981, 1994 Foreword © Julian Oswald 1994 All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • The Early Us-Japan Economic Relationship and the Rise of Shōwa
    THE EARLY U.S.-JAPAN ECONOMIC RELATIONSHIP AND THE RISE OF SHŌWA MILITARISM A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of The School of Continuing Studies and of The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Liberal Studies By Keith J. Kennebeck, BBA Georgetown University Washington, D.C. 03/27/2012 Copyright 2012 by Keith J. Kennebeck All Rights Reserved ii THE EARLY U.S.-JAPAN ECONOMIC RELATIONSHIP AND THE RISE OF SHŌWA MILITARISM Keith J. Kennebeck, BBA MALS Mentor: Michael C. Wall, PhD ABSTRACT The notion that the bilateral economic relationship between the United States and Japan played a central role in prompting the Pacific War is not a novel concept. In particular, the number of scholarly and popular works that have identified the United States’ escalating use of trade and financial sanctions in the late 1930s and early 1940s as a response to Japan’s increasing military advances in Asia are numerous. Such discussions on the Pacific War emphasize that the U.S.-imposed export embargoes on strategic goods and resources and freezes on Japanese financial assets eventually prompted Japan to attack Pearl Harbor in late 1941. More importantly, these discussions are punctuated with the moral argument that the U.S.-imposed embargoes were necessary, and that war was essentially inevitable, given Japan’s brutal occupations of China and Southeast Asia. In short, so the standard argument goes, Japan’s unjustifiable rise towards militarism prompted an end to the bilateral economic relationship, which in turn prompted the onset of the Pacific War.
    [Show full text]
  • Csu Japanese American Digitization Project Collections
    CSU JAPANESE AMERICAN DIGITIZATION PROJECT COLLECTIONS CSUJAD Partners California Historical Society California Polytechnic University San Luis Obispo California State University, Bakersfield California State University, Channel Islands California State University, Dominguez Hills (central hub) California State University, East Bay California State University, Fresno California State University, Fullerton, Center for Oral and Public History California State University, Fullerton, University Archives and Special Collections California State University, Long Beach California State University, Monterey Bay California State University, Northridge California State University, San Bernardino California State University, Stanislaus Claremont University Consortium Libraries Claremont School of Theology Eastern California Museum Go For Broke National Educational Center Historical Society of Long Beach Japanese American National Museum Palos Verdes Library District Sacramento State University San Diego State University San Francisco State University San Jose State University Sonoma State University Topaz Museum University of California, Santa Barbara Whittier Public Library The central focus of the California State University Japanese American Digitization Project is the digitization and access to primary source materials focused on the mass incarceration of Japanese Americans during World War II, but also related to the history and progress of Japanese Americans in their communities throughout the 20th century. An enormous range of subjects and
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Gunboat Diplomacy: Power and Profit at Sea in the Making of the International System J.C. Sharman, University of Cambridge, J
    Gunboat Diplomacy: Power and Profit at Sea in the Making of the International System J.C. Sharman, University of Cambridge, [email protected] Abstract: The making of the international system from c.1500 reflected distinctively maritime dynamics, especially ‘gunboat diplomacy’, the ‘profit from power’ strategy of using naval force for commercial gain. Much more than in land warfare in Europe, war and trade at sea in the wider world were often inseparable, with violence being a central part of the commercial strategies of state, private and hybrid actors alike. Gunboat diplomacy was idiosyncratically European: large and small non-Western powers with equivalent technology almost never sought to advance mercantile aims through large-scale naval coercion, instead adopting a laissez faire separation of war and commerce. Changes in international norms first restricted the practice of gunboat diplomacy to states in the nineteenth century, and then led to its effective abolition in the twentieth century, as it became illegitimate to resolve trade and sovereign debt disputes through inter-state violence. Evidence is drawn from macro-historical comparisons of successive European-Asian encounters from the sixteenth to the twentieth century. 1 From the late 1400s, the European military and commercial engagements with the rest of the world that first created the modern international system were essentially maritime in nature. Yet in crafting theories of international politics, social scientists have generally maintained a firmly terrestrial orientation in concentrating on armies, states and land, rather than navies, seaborne commerce, and the oceans. European maritime expansion had a distinctive character in both its means and ends.
    [Show full text]
  • Social and Behavioural Sciences
    European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences EpSBS www.europeanproceedings.com e-ISSN: 2357-1330 DOI: 10.15405/epsbs.2021.06.03.92 AMURCON 2020 International Scientific Conference COMBINATORIAL POTENTIAL OF A WORD IN CROSS- LANGUAGE CONSIDERATION (BASED ON COGNATE WORDS) Inna O. Onal (a)* *Corresponding author (a) Novosibirsk State Technical University, 20 K. Marksa Ave., Novosibirsk, Russia, [email protected] Abstract The article gives the analysis of combinatory and semantic features of the English lexeme diplomacy and its Turkish equivalent diplomasi in cross-language consideration. The study is conducted in the framework of combinatorial linguistics that studies the linear relationship of language units and their combinatorial potential. To answer the research questions of the study, the most productive structural patterns of the collocations with the lexemes diplomacy and diplomasi are identified as well as semantic groups of words the given lexemes combine with. Then a comparative analysis of English and Turkish collocations with the given lexemes is performed. The research is based on the lexicographic sources, the national corpora of the given languages as well as collections of media texts compiled by the author. The main method used in this study is combinatorial analysis, which allows to establish both regular and possible syntagmatic connections of a word at the syntactic and lexical-semantic levels, due to various extralinguistic situations. The appeal to the media texts is explained by the fact that political discourse and media discourse are currently among the most popular areas of attention for linguists, since it is in political discourse that the processes associated with changes in the vocabulary of any language are most pronounced.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Meiji Diplomacy Viewed Through the Lens of the International Treaties Culminating in the Annexation of the Ryukyus
    Volume 19 | Issue 6 | Number 2 | Article ID 5558 | Mar 15, 2021 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Early Meiji Diplomacy Viewed through the Lens of the International Treaties Culminating in the Annexation of the Ryukyus Marco Tinello Abstract: This paper focuses on Meiji Japan’s imposed an “unequal treaty” on Korea, annexation of the Ryukyus as seen through the employing the same kind of gunboat diplomacy eyes of key Western diplomats in the 1870s. that Commodore Matthew Perry had used Although it played out over seven years, the against Japan in 1853-54. Finally, in 1879, annexation process unfolded relativelyJapan formally annexed the former kingdom of smoothly on the international stage. One the Ryukyus reason for this was the skill with which Japanese diplomats handled inquiries and potential protests by Western diplomats. In this article, I show that, as early as 1872, leading members of the Meiji government were gaining familiarity with the nuances of Western diplomatic maneuvering. Indeed, in some ways the annexation functioned as a rehearsal for future diplomatic challenges the regime would face. In retrospect, it offers an excellent lens through which to view Japanese diplomacy of the 1870s.1 Keywords: East Asian diplomacy, Meiji Japan’s diplomacy; Ryūkyū shobun; the Ryukyu Kingdom’s annexation by Japan; Western imperialism; international treaties. Following the restoration of imperial power, Meiji Japan embraced modernization and, as part of this process, it sought to determine its national borders in order to create a modern
    [Show full text]